Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
* EN BANC.
433
434
instance, the law requires that there be first a lawful arrest before
a search can be made—the process cannot be reversed
Same; Same; Same; The search was not incidental to an
arrest. There was no warrant of arrest and the warrantless arrest
did not fall under the exemptions allowed by the Rules of Court.—
The search was not incidental to an arrest. There was no warrant
of arrest and the warrantless arrest did not fall under the
exemptions allowed by the Rules of Court as already shown. From
all indications, the search was nothing but a fishing expedition. It
is worth mentioning here that after introducing themselves, the
police officers immediately inquired about the contents of the bag.
What else could have impelled the officers from displaying such
inordinate interest in the bag but to ferret out evidence and
discover if a felony had indeed been committed by CHUA—in
effect to “retroactively establish probable cause and validate an
illegal search and seizure.”
Same; Same; Same; It cannot logically be inferred from his
alleged cognizance of the “sign language” that he deliberately,
intelligently, and consciously waived his right against such an
intrusive search.—CHUA obviously failed to understand the
events that overran and overwhelmed him. The police officers
already introduced themselves to CHUA in three languages, but
he remained completely deadpan. The police hence concluded that
CHUA failed to comprehend the three languages. When CHUA
failed to respond again to the police’s request to open the bag,
they resorted to what they called “sign language.” They claimed
that CHUA finally understood their hand motions and gestures.
This Court disagrees. If CHUA could not understand what was
orally articulated to him, how could he understand the police’s
“sign language.” More importantly, it cannot logically be inferred
from his alleged cognizance of the “sign language” that he
deliberately, intelligently, and consciously waived his right
against such an intrusive search. This Court is not unmindful of
cases upholding the validity of consented warrantless searches
and seizure. But in these cases, the police officers’ request to
search personnel effects was orally articulated to the accused and
in such language that left no room for doubt that the latter fully
understood what was requested. In some instances, the accused
even verbally replied to the request demonstrating that he also
understood the nature and consequences of such request.
Same; Same; Same; Evidence obtained during an illegal
search tending to confirm or actually confirming initial
information or
435
_______________
437
_______________
3 Exhibit “C.”
4 Exhibit “F.” It was completed on the same day of the arrest and
search.
439
_______________
442
coming to the Country from China and Taiwan, this Court finds
the accused Chua Ho San @ Tsay Ho San guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of the offense of Violation of Sec. 15, Art. III of
R.A. No. 6425, as amended by R.A. No. 7659 as charged in the
Information, and considering the provisions of Sec. 20 of R.A. No.
7659 that the maximum penalty shall be imposed if the quantity
sold/possessed/transported is ‘200 grams or more’ in the case of
Shabu, and considering, further that the quantity involved in this
case is 28.7 kilograms which is far beyond the weight ceiling
specified in said Act, coupled with the findings of conspiracy or
that accused is a member of an organized syndicated crime group,
this Court, having no other recourse but to impose the maximum
penalty to accused, this Court hereby sentences the said accused
Chua Ho San @ Tsay Ho San to die by lethal injection; to pay a
fine of Ten Million Pesos (P10,000,000.00); and to pay the costs.
The Court hereby orders Director Ricareido [sic] Sarmiento of
the Philippine National Police to immediately form an
investigating Committee to be composed by [sic] men of
unimpeachable integrity, who will conduct an exhaustive
investigation regarding this case to determine whether there was
negligence or conspiracy in the escape of Cho Chu Rong and the
two (2) or three (3) persons who approached the accused in the
seashore of Tammocalao, Bacnotan, La Union, and attempted to
take the remaining bag from accused, as well as the whereabouts
of the other bag; and to furnish this Court a copy of the
report/result of the said investigation in order to show compliance
herewith sixty (60) days from receipt hereof.
The confiscated 28.7 kilograms of Methamphetamine
Hydrochloride or Shabu is ordered turned over immediately to the
Dangerous Drugs Board for destruction in accordance with the
law.
The fiberglass boat with its motor engine is hereby ordered
confiscated in favor of the government and to be turned over to
the Philippine National Police, La Union Command, for use in
their BantayDagat operations against all illegal seaborne
activities.
6
SO ORDERED.
Before this Court, CHUA posits that the RTC erred in (1)
admitting as competent evidence the 29 plastic packets of
methamphetamine hydrochloride since they were
indubitably
_______________
443
_______________
444
_______________
445
_______________
(b) When an offense has in fact just been committed, and he has
personal knowledge of facts indicating that the person to be
arrested has committed it; and
(c) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from
a penal establishment or place where he is serving final judgment
or temporarily confined while his case is pending, or has escaped
while being transferred from one confinement to another . . . .
446
_______________
447
_______________
20 People v. Claudio, supra note 15; See also People v. Lacerna, supra
note 11.
21 People v. Maspil, Jr., supra note 15; People v. Lo Ho Wing, supra
note 15.
22 People v. Tangliben, supra note 5; Posadas v. Court of Appeals, supra
note 12.
23 People v. Malmstedt, supra note 15.
448
Q How far were you when the accused put the bag on his
shoulder?
A We were then very near him about three meters away
from the male person carrying the bag.
Q To what direction was he facing when he put the bag on
his shoulder?
A To the east direction.
Q In relation to you, where were you.
A With the company of Sgt. Reynoso and Maj. Cid we
approached the accused and when Maj. Cid went near
him, he spoke in Tagalog, English and Ilocano which
accused did not understand because he did not respond.
Q When Maj. Cid was talking, what was the accused doing
at that time?
A He was walking.
Q To what direction he was walking?
A He was walking to the east direction. (sic)
Q He was walking away from you or going near you?
A He was going away from us. That is why Sgt. Reynoso
held the right arm of the accused.
Q Was Sgt. Badua able to hold the right arm of the
accused?
24
A Yes sir and he stopped.
_______________
449
_______________
450
_______________
451
452
Q Okey, (sic) you did not ask the accused, mr. (sic)
witness, to open his bag?
A No, sir.
Q But you simply requested him to open the bag?
30
A Yes, sir.
_______________
30 TSN, 22 February 1996, pp. 1922.
31 In People v. Montilla, supra note 15 at 722, the accused was asked
about the contents of the bag and he replied that they contained personal
effects. The officers then asked him to open the traveling bag and he
voluntary submitted to the search. In People v. Lacerna, supra note 11 at
575576 [1997], the accused expressly gave his permission to have his
luggage searched. In People v. Omaweng, 213 SCRA 462, 470 [1992] the
accused replied to the police’s query for a search with “[y]ou can see the
contents of the bag but those are only clothings.” In People v. Ramos, supra
note 12, the testimony of
453
_______________
454
_______________
33 Mapp v. Ohio, 367 US 643, 659 [1961].
34 Dans, Jr. v. People, 285 SCRA 504, 533 [1998]; See also People v.
Hilario, 284 SCRA 344, 454 [1998].
455
Costs de oficio.
SO ORDERED.
——o0o——